http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3616





------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-04-05 03:55 -------
> I like Scott's suggestion.  But it applies to SPF in general, not just neutral
> SPF records.

Nice try, but it won't work... :-(

> E.g. a +all should be scored differently than a +ip4, just as a 
> ?all should be scored differently than a ?ip4, and 
> +all should be scored differently than a +ip4...

Consider the following SPF record:

'v=spf1 ip4:0.0.0.0/1 ip4:128.0.0.0/2 ip4:192.0.0.0/3 -all'

This will match the same IPs as 'v=spf1 +all', right? From the proposed
perspective it would look much better though. I think we shouldn't try to get
more information from the SPF record than is in it. There are so many ways to
hide an overly lenient SPF record (using the exists mechanism and a stunt DNS
server resolving the full IP4 address space comes to mind), that it isn't even
worth trying.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

Reply via email to